Radar Armenia's interlocutor is Shahan Gantaharyan, an international scholar.

- The issue of the Lachine Corridor was discussed at the UN Security Council session. What is the importance of the discussion in this session, and what does this give to the Armenian side?

- Let me analyze the session of the UN Security Council from the Middle Eastern point of view. We are used to following the sessions of the UN, discussed in different formats, to overcome the humanitarian and security situations related to Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, the Palestinian issue, and similar alarming countries, from which statements, appeals, and resolutions will come out. Still, no groundbreaking event will be recorded on the ground. This speaks of a long process. The problem is firmly due to the maturation of the political moment, so the barometer of the ceiling of expectations should be low. When the political moment is ripe, the relevant decisions of the UN will go to the practical stage. You see that even the mandatory decision of the International Court of Justice needs to be implemented, and the international community needs to take reasonable steps for this. There is no pure legality. There is a legal policy. The visible, practical stage of implementing the calls of the UN will be when they start implementing a policy of sanctions.

- What will be the consequences of the UN Security Council discussion?

- The UN Security Council convenes an emergency session for the second time. There are two critical circumstances for the internationalization of the Artsakh issue. Giving a humanitarian capacity to the problem, especially the geopolitical competition of mediation or assurance. The second one speaks about the possibility of extending the process. And the time delay is favorable for the Armenian side because Azerbaijan is in a hurry and constantly pressing. Focusing on the purely humanitarian character distracts from the essence of the conflict, and Baku takes the opportunity to emphasize that if the aim is to reach the place of aid, then the humanitarian assistance can get to Artsakh via the Aghdam route, which is only requested with the numbering policy put forward by Azerbaijan. This trend may lead to the involvement of various UN structures, which were heard in Washington and Brussels on different occasions.

- Recently, the document proposed by Sergey Lavrov was made public: "Main principles and parameters for ensuring the security and rights of the Armenian population in the Nagorno-Karabakh region of the former Azerbaijani SSR, in accordance with the legislation of Azerbaijan." What do you think about this document? What are the risks here?

- The statements of official Moscow should be considered within the limits of the reality of the most critical junction for the Russian Federation. On the one hand, Moscow is trying to avoid ceding mediator status to other international instruments and, on the other hand, to ensure the extension of its peacekeeping mission. These are the two main priority directions in Moscow's Artsakh policy. That is why the statements should be such that Azerbaijan can implement these two directions.

- Azerbaijan continuously increases its aggressive behavior. Even shot at the representatives of the EU mission. In essence, nothing constrains Azerbaijan. Why did the representatives of the EU mission not only not give an adequate assessment, but at first, they even denied that there was a shooting in their area of responsibility?

- Azerbaijan knows the ongoing political moment and implements international calls and statements against it. He realizes that at the moment, the war in Ukraine, Moscow-Ankara cooperation, albeit strained, and his oil deals guarantee his impunity for his actions in the direction of Artsakh. The forces that do not punish Azerbaijan do not allow the Artsakh conflict to be resolved only by the rules of the game determined by Azerbaijan. In fact, at this moment, neither the "Zangezuri Corridor" has been opened, nor has the distinction been carried out, nor has the peace agreement edited by Baku been signed. The Artsakh problem has geopolitical involvement, which speaks of its long-term nature.
The current behavior of the EU should be understood under these circumstances. Fact collectors and needs researchers cannot punish Azerbaijan, nor do they want to remain involved in the process. However, to reach agreements, they are competing against Russia with parallel processes, coordinating their steps with Washington.

- Doesn't this incident call into question the impartiality of the EU observation mission?

- Impartiality is not a political category. With the motivation of remaining involved in the processes in the region and factoring, one should understand the statements, steps, and statements of the leading players. And in this regard, the EU is no exception.

Hayk Magoyan